8 ms·

I hope that Holmes' bizarre behavior as the issues went public keep her from ever running anything even remotely close to things that matter for people's lives

by bane 10y ago

I hope that Holmes' bizarre behavior as the issues went public keep her from ever running anything even remotely close to things that matter for people's lives and well being. Even as the questions were building and the noose was tightening, she would announce a public talk to reveal and openly share information on the company's tech, then mysteriously cancel a short while later -- she did this over and over. I'm still not convinced that Theranos was meant to be a scam, or at least not a scam in the way most people are thinking about it. But it has definitely produced a similar output, and that makes it functionally equivalent. I hope, really hope, that someday the true story about all the WTF-ness around Holmes and Theranos comes out. I've been on the inside of a company like this once and I ran away as soon as I realized the place was up to no good. What still bothers me about my personal experience is that I, even as a person on the inside, still don't know the truth about that company due to all the same weird kind of cult of secrecy things we've seen at Theranos. The truth in these kinds of things, I suspect, lives only inside the heads of the people who run these kinds of organizations and it may not ever be possible to get at what the truth actually is depending on how far down the delusion hole they've fallen. Real kudos to the press who broke and made very public the stories. This was the media at its finest. Those journalists may have helped save many lives.

nashashmi 10y ago
I'm curious. I have not heard a single thing about Theranos's downfall outside of the comments here on HN. Since you mention "press who broke ... stories", are there any articles out there that would also make me join the "Theranos is a fraud" crowd?
- qf303rjr3 10y ago
  Much of the initial reporting was by John Careyrou, writing for the Wall Street Journal. This article is representative: http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-blood-tests-1444881901 http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-bloo...
  - RockyMcNuts 10y ago
    Kevin Loria and the Business Insider folks were on it before WSJ and deserve a shout-out (not to take away from WSJ who busted it wide open) http://www.businessinsider.com/science-of-elizabeth-holmes-theranos-2015-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/science-of-elizabeth-holmes-t... http://www.businessinsider.com.au/scientist-skeptical-thranos-blood-test-elizabeth-holmes-2015-6 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/scientist-skeptical-thrano...
- bdalgaard 10y ago
  The Wall Street Journal has had the most to say about Thernanos from what I've seen. The most active Theranos threads on HN look like they are from WSJ artciles. Here is the thread for the first WSJ articles where I started seeing this story pick up steam if you are interested. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10391313 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10391313
- miraj 10y ago
  wow thats some bubble you live in! here: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&pre...
  - miraj 10y ago
    p.s. this one was particularly insightful, as it was a scientific clinical review. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11727529 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11727529
- bane 10y ago
  Issues with Theranos and the company's claims have been widely reported. One of the reasons there were discussions here on HN was that the news and articles that brought up these issues were submitted, voted up and then we all had a discussion on those articles and videos. The WSJ reporting in particular has been deeply investigative where most of the rest of the media has just sniffed around at what appears to be a problem. Holmes' interviews in particular are some of the weirdest things I've ever seen, here's a fairly typical example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY Here's some examples of the media coverage of the company: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=theranos&oq=theranos&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j0l9j43i53.2183.3404.0.3779.8.8.0.0.0.0.97.526.8.8.0...0.0...1ac.1.s7u2F9dEF4o https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0... and here on HN https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&pre... and specificially about Holmes https://hn.algolia.com/?query=elizabeth%20holmes&sort=byPopularity&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=elizabeth%20holmes&sort=byPopu...
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
rcarrigan87 10y ago
Not sure if scam is the right word. Everyone is capable of deluding themselves into believing their current, morally questionable actions will be seen as justified in the future (when everything works, out of course). I'm sure even Bernie Madoff believed at some point he would win it all back and no one would ever know or be harmed.
- jonknee 10y ago
  Yes, but the internal justifications of a scam artists are just that. It's still a scam to everyone else!
  - pyre 10y ago
    I think that parent is classifying a "true" scam as one where the scammer knows that they are scamming and just doesn't care. 419 scammers take money away from people and have no intention to ever "make things right." They may have internal justifications that "rich Westerners" can afford it, but that's slightly different than justifying that your tech will work out (or that our pyramid scheme will work out) in the end.
- scott_s 10y ago
  I don't agree with your characterization of Bernie Madoff. He knew he was running a scam. He was clearly lying in his marketing materials, saying his fund performed certain trades that they never did. (See Harry Markopolos' book, "No One Would Listen"; that's how Markopolos figured out it was a scam.) I think Madoff is, at the least, a borderline sociopath. (If not an outright one.) A sociopath may think they can get away with it, and no one will know, but they probably don't think no one will be harmed - a sociopath does not care about harming others. I think it's possible Holmes fits your description - she was in over her head, never set out to scam anyone, and slid down a very bad path without ever intending to. I don't know this is the case, but I believe it's possible. That, however, is not Madoff.
  - mbesto 10y ago
    > He was clearly lying in his marketing materials, saying his fund performed certain trades that they never did. Theranos marketing materials lied. Only difference is they changed the marketing materials after they got caught. > never set out to scam anyone How do you know? Maybe that's been part of her scam...to operate it under the guise of a venture funded startup. The difference between Madoff and Holmes is that Madoff's scam is purely financial, so it's easy to understand motive. It's slightly harder to understand for Holmes' case and the verdict is still out.
dingbat 10y ago
> Real kudos to the press who broke and made very public the stories. This was the media at its finest. On the other hand, most of the press was more than happy to play along with this charade. Those in the media who ran with lazy profiles enabling this fraud should be remembered.
- danso 10y ago
  The Wall Street Journal, and in particular, reporter John Carreyrou, deserve a special callout for launching an investigation while the rest of the press was idle. I was struck by this ProPublica podcast with Carreyrou in which the interviewer, a Pulitzer Prize winner himself, said he and other health reporters had heard grumblings and rumors but don't enough to pursue a closer look. Carreyrou, on the other hand, said he acted on a New Yorker profile (which, IMHO, was fairly well balanced) in which he was curious how the company could keep its technology so obscured. https://www.propublica.org/podcast/item/how-a-reporter-pierced-the-hype-behind-theranos https://www.propublica.org/podcast/item/how-a-reporter-pierc... http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler
- bane 10y ago
  yeah, absolutely true. The tech press was (as typical) atrocious, not much more than the caricature of tech blogs in Silicon Valley. The mainstream press was slightly better in at least raising the questions. It was obvious for more than a year that something was up with them. Holmes' complete inability to answer simple direct questions was a huge flag to me, and when I saw it in interviews I was really waiting for the press to pounce and it just never seemed to come. "So you say you aren't approved to do any testing?" wink wink "<typical long winded Holmesian answer>" "moving on, what's it like being a woman running a startup?"

by bane 10y ago

nashashmi 10y ago

I'm curious. I have not heard a single thing about Theranos's downfall outside of the comments here on HN. Since you mention "press who broke ... stories", are there any articles out there that would also make me join the "Theranos is a fraud" crowd?

qf303rjr3 10y ago
Much of the initial reporting was by John Careyrou, writing for the Wall Street Journal. This article is representative: http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-blood-tests-1444881901 http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-bloo...
- RockyMcNuts 10y ago
  Kevin Loria and the Business Insider folks were on it before WSJ and deserve a shout-out (not to take away from WSJ who busted it wide open) http://www.businessinsider.com/science-of-elizabeth-holmes-theranos-2015-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/science-of-elizabeth-holmes-t... http://www.businessinsider.com.au/scientist-skeptical-thranos-blood-test-elizabeth-holmes-2015-6 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/scientist-skeptical-thrano...
bdalgaard 10y ago
The Wall Street Journal has had the most to say about Thernanos from what I've seen. The most active Theranos threads on HN look like they are from WSJ artciles. Here is the thread for the first WSJ articles where I started seeing this story pick up steam if you are interested. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10391313 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10391313
miraj 10y ago
wow thats some bubble you live in! here: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&pre...
- miraj 10y ago
  p.s. this one was particularly insightful, as it was a scientific clinical review. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11727529 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11727529
bane 10y ago
Issues with Theranos and the company's claims have been widely reported. One of the reasons there were discussions here on HN was that the news and articles that brought up these issues were submitted, voted up and then we all had a discussion on those articles and videos. The WSJ reporting in particular has been deeply investigative where most of the rest of the media has just sniffed around at what appears to be a problem. Holmes' interviews in particular are some of the weirdest things I've ever seen, here's a fairly typical example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY Here's some examples of the media coverage of the company: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=theranos&oq=theranos&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j0l9j43i53.2183.3404.0.3779.8.8.0.0.0.0.97.526.8.8.0...0.0...1ac.1.s7u2F9dEF4o https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0... and here on HN https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=theranos&sort=byPopularity&pre... and specificially about Holmes https://hn.algolia.com/?query=elizabeth%20holmes&sort=byPopularity&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=elizabeth%20holmes&sort=byPopu...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

rcarrigan87 10y ago

Not sure if scam is the right word. Everyone is capable of deluding themselves into believing their current, morally questionable actions will be seen as justified in the future (when everything works, out of course). I'm sure even Bernie Madoff believed at some point he would win it all back and no one would ever know or be harmed.

jonknee 10y ago
Yes, but the internal justifications of a scam artists are just that. It's still a scam to everyone else!
- pyre 10y ago
  I think that parent is classifying a "true" scam as one where the scammer knows that they are scamming and just doesn't care. 419 scammers take money away from people and have no intention to ever "make things right." They may have internal justifications that "rich Westerners" can afford it, but that's slightly different than justifying that your tech will work out (or that our pyramid scheme will work out) in the end.
scott_s 10y ago
I don't agree with your characterization of Bernie Madoff. He knew he was running a scam. He was clearly lying in his marketing materials, saying his fund performed certain trades that they never did. (See Harry Markopolos' book, "No One Would Listen"; that's how Markopolos figured out it was a scam.) I think Madoff is, at the least, a borderline sociopath. (If not an outright one.) A sociopath may think they can get away with it, and no one will know, but they probably don't think no one will be harmed - a sociopath does not care about harming others. I think it's possible Holmes fits your description - she was in over her head, never set out to scam anyone, and slid down a very bad path without ever intending to. I don't know this is the case, but I believe it's possible. That, however, is not Madoff.
- mbesto 10y ago
  > He was clearly lying in his marketing materials, saying his fund performed certain trades that they never did. Theranos marketing materials lied. Only difference is they changed the marketing materials after they got caught. > never set out to scam anyone How do you know? Maybe that's been part of her scam...to operate it under the guise of a venture funded startup. The difference between Madoff and Holmes is that Madoff's scam is purely financial, so it's easy to understand motive. It's slightly harder to understand for Holmes' case and the verdict is still out.

dingbat 10y ago

> Real kudos to the press who broke and made very public the stories. This was the media at its finest. On the other hand, most of the press was more than happy to play along with this charade. Those in the media who ran with lazy profiles enabling this fraud should be remembered.

danso 10y ago
The Wall Street Journal, and in particular, reporter John Carreyrou, deserve a special callout for launching an investigation while the rest of the press was idle. I was struck by this ProPublica podcast with Carreyrou in which the interviewer, a Pulitzer Prize winner himself, said he and other health reporters had heard grumblings and rumors but don't enough to pursue a closer look. Carreyrou, on the other hand, said he acted on a New Yorker profile (which, IMHO, was fairly well balanced) in which he was curious how the company could keep its technology so obscured. https://www.propublica.org/podcast/item/how-a-reporter-pierced-the-hype-behind-theranos https://www.propublica.org/podcast/item/how-a-reporter-pierc... http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler
bane 10y ago
yeah, absolutely true. The tech press was (as typical) atrocious, not much more than the caricature of tech blogs in Silicon Valley. The mainstream press was slightly better in at least raising the questions. It was obvious for more than a year that something was up with them. Holmes' complete inability to answer simple direct questions was a huge flag to me, and when I saw it in interviews I was really waiting for the press to pounce and it just never seemed to come. "So you say you aren't approved to do any testing?" wink wink "<typical long winded Holmesian answer>" "moving on, what's it like being a woman running a startup?"